🔗 Share this article

Iturns out the manager was able to withstand a loss to lower-league opposition. Survive a decisive continental showpiece against one of the worst Spurs sides for many years. He withstood losing at home against West Ham and Wolves, a lowly league position, his rigid approach, squandering some of the club’s best homegrown talent, the 32% win rate, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. But there was one adversary with whom Ruben Amorim would not be allowed to dance. If you challenge Jason Wilcox, and you best not miss.

Unfortunately, like many a top-flight defender during Blackburn Rovers' title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have missed. Even the most casual observer will notice the irony here: a coach who frequently berated at his players for losing one-on-one duels succumbing in the face of the white heat and formidable presence of one of the Premier League’s most feared sporting directors.

In truth, this entire painful saga appears to portray the director in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been easy, given his nine months in a similar role at Southampton, to regard Jason Wilcox as merely a drudge within the club's structure: a man whose appointment was due largely to his friendship with ex-colleague a fellow executive rather than any demonstrable skill. How mistaken we all were. In brilliantly outmanoeuvring United’s feted manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, he has demonstrated as one of the sport’s true generals: a tactical intellect of which United’s competitors are now justifiably concerned.

A Tactical Conflict Regarding Formation and Philosophy

For example, it was the director who being involved in the leadership that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach in the first place, played a key role in attempting to convince him to abandon his favored 3-4-3. Naturally, these entreaties met a certain resistance. However, these judgements carry more weight when issued from the mouth of a man the unimpeachable football pedigree he possesses, a veteran of three England caps and a contributor to a championship team from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time he might agree to outline his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked why Amorim is walking away with full compensation, with no compensation reduction clause in place. The director seldom speaks publicly, for excellent reasons. The true intellectuals in football – men like Jason Wilcox – function at a level exceeding our mundane comprehension. Were he to speak, most likely all we would hear would be high-frequency signals and four-dimensional whirring. Desiring an explanation is not quite the same as being prepared to receive.

An Ultimate Authority Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, after all, simply carrying out the commands of his ultimate line manager Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who in private has made very clear his desire for a four-man defense. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also proposed deploying the forward in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for United to adopt data science and metrics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit soon after his investment, he announced that United’s style to football “will be decided by this group”.

After all, Ratcliffe is an expert in these intricate footballing stuff, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he remains incredibly rich, and it is known, the rich are the best of us: more perceptive, more wise, more tactically astute, simply better. Whom else would you trust to oversee a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the construction of a modern arena that looks a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of a new striker?

The Modern Soccer Hierarchy: Executives Over Coaches

This is a trend we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. For decades, clubs foolishly entrusted major sporting choices to low-level employees such as coaches, talent spotters – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for an up-and-coming, visionary coach with a philosophy and drive to go into an organization and see their vision supported to fruition. Yet how many companies have such individuals set up? How many large-scale layoffs have they managed? Far preferable to place genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping professional resumes. It is wiser to decide the tactics by the directors and hire a coach who can tailor their methods to suit. If managers were formerly chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not creating the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives poorly or fails of the box.

In the meantime, their job has become less about crafting the philosophy and more about selling it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the visible figurehead of an organisation they can do little to influence. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into Europe and secures two medium-sized trophies, and effectively gets sacked for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined while the people who appointed him live to blunder indefinitely.

The Neoliberal Football: Accountability for the Coaches

And perhaps on some microcosmic level this represents neoliberalism at work: the rise of a privileged overclass who are infallible, whose decisions remain sacrosanct, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without justification. Hire the 3-4-3 coach and then dismiss them for using too much 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and then bin him for requiring excessive time. And most importantly be grateful; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for your new summer signings, for the fact that the grownups – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.